The Dutch MP Geert Wilders was greeted with applause from the public gallery as he faced court for the first day of his landmark trial on charges of inciting racial hatred against Muslims.
Mr Wilders, 46, sat impassively as his lawyer argued that the leader of the Freedom Party, which made big gains at last summer's European elections, had made his critical remarks about Islam in his role as an elected Member of Parliament.
Bram Moszkowicz said that Mr Wilders had a mandate to speak out against what he saw as the Islamisation of the Netherlands and argued that he had not discriminated against a specific national group, saving his attacks for the ideology of political Islam.
Around 200 supporters of Mr Wilders had travelled from as far as Cologne in Germany to hold up placards declaring that free speech was under assault by Islam and by the politically correct. The case is being watched as a test of the limits of political tolerance in the Netherlands after years of relaxed immigration policies which have seen the Musim population rise to around 1 million out of 16 million.
"This case is about more than Mr Wilders," Mr Moszkowicz told Amsterdam District Court this morning. "It touches us all. It is such an important and principled question that could have far-reaching consequences."
Mr Wilders faces a 70-page charge sheet covering five counts of breaking Dutch law on incitement and discriminiation against Muslims in more than 100 public statements, for example by likenening the Koran to Adolf Hitler'sMein Kampf and calling for an end to the "Islamic invasion."
The alleged offences include Mr Wilders' film Fitna, which shows images of 9/11 and beheadings interspersed with verses from theKoran. It ends with a the controverisal Danish cartoon of the prophet Muhammad wearing a bomb as a turban.
At one point there was laughter in the public gallery when Mr Moszkowicz tried to insist on his client's right to have the entire charge sheet read out in court. The chief prosecutor refused saying that his voice would not hold out that long and the panel of four judges settled for a summary which still lasted almost 20 minutes.
"Mr Wilders has always made his statements in his capacity as a public representative," Mr Moszkowicz said, arguing that the Amsterdam court was the wrong arena and that the Supreme Court in The Hague was the place to hear allegations of misconduct by an MP.
But Birgit van Roessel, for the prosecution, countered that "expressing his opinion in the media or through other channels is not part of an MP's duties." She said that MPs only had immunity for what they said inside parliament. He faces a fine or the possbility of jail if convicted.
The public prosecution service initially decided not to bring charges but were ordered to press ahead by the appeals court. Otto van der Bijl, a spokesman for the prosecution service, today said: "It is possible that we may ask for an acquittal at the end of the trial."
Ulrich Rosendahl, 46, an engineer who took the day off work to travel from Cologne to support Mr Wilders, held up a banner outside the court which read: "Wilders does as [Charlie] Chaplin did. He attacks fascism — Islamo."
Mr Rosendahl said: "I support what he says and I know he has lived under police protection for many years and I think that he pays a high price to fight for freedom of speech."
Anne Wirix, 71, from Schagen in the north of Holland, travelled for two hours to come and support Mr Wilders. "This weekend I am 72 and never in my life have I demonstrated for something until now. I think it is necessary because of the lack of freedom to say what you want. Mr Wilders says the words that a lot of us think."
